Why no talk of death penalty for Penn State? | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Why no talk of death penalty for Penn State?

Status
Not open for further replies.
mattp said:
we have problems because we realize there's a difference between real crime and NCAA violations? i think you have the problem b/c you can't seem to tell the difference between real-life criminal behavior and cheating at sports. the NCAA is supposed to deal with cheating at sports and the courts deal with real crime. if the AD for a school murders his neighbor b/c he found out his wife was cheating with him, should the NCAA get involved?
Expand ...

If the school covered up the murder for decades, allowing the AD to commit additional murders, then yeah, the NCAA should get involved.

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/ncaa-has-authority-to-give-penn-state-death-penalty.php

This link describes the situation, and the head of the NCAA agrees with me.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
This link describes the situation, and the head of the NCAA agrees with me.
Expand ...

we'll find out if he agrees with you when he makes a ruling. his response you linked to basically says nothing, it's a noncommittal statement that if the NCAA should do something they will.

i'm done with this debate b/c obviously we're never going to agree. i think some things are more important than sports and need to be dealt with at a higher level. that anyone would mention the death penalty for PSU more than the death penalty for Jerry Sandusky shows me that some people need to rethink their priorities. it seems some people are more interested in punishing PennState than punishing the actual people involved. my number one concern is that Sandusky and the administrators that looked the other way may not be punished, which is a very possible outcome. taking away 85 scholarship opportunities and bankrupting a college are not the best outcome. Sandusky and company spending time in jail is the best outcome
 
mattp said:
we'll find out if he agrees with you when he makes a ruling. his response you linked to basically says nothing, it's a noncommittal statement that if the NCAA should do something they will.

i'm done with this debate b/c obviously we're never going to agree. i think some things are more important than sports and need to be dealt with at a higher level. that anyone would mention the death penalty for PSU more than the death penalty for Jerry Sandusky shows me that some people need to rethink their priorities. it seems some people are more interested in punishing PennState than punishing the actual people involved. my number one concern is that Sandusky and the administrators that looked the other way may not be punished, which is a very possible outcome
Expand ...


I think any person that thinks covering up a serial rapist is not deserving of punishment needs to re-think their priorities.
 
NHUConnfan said:
Really? I think this was rather a move to protect the university...which in that case is not an NCAA issue. Even if it was to protect the football program, it was only in proxy to protect the university.
Expand ...
Did Penn State leave the NCAA?

I think this has to play out before the NCAA can formally approach the situation. However, thinking it has no reason to act on a potential decade long cover-up at the highest levels of a member institution is shortsighted.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
I think any person that thinks covering up a serial rapist is not deserving of punishment needs to re-think their priorities.
Expand ...

yeah, because that's exactly what i said, you friggin genius.

since your reading comprehension is obviously poor, why don't you have someone else read my post to you and you'll see where i said i want everyone involved in the cover up punished. You, on the other hand are more worried about punishing the school, every PSU student/teacher/alumni, and high school kids that needs scholarships. that you can't tell the difference is ridiculous and i'm done discussing this....this time i mean it (i hope)
 
Disagree. I've read that NCAA guidebook again, and I can't find a single statement in all 439 pages that give the NCAA grounds to go through a violations investigation procedure.

It's a problem with the NCAA itself.

And maybe you misunderstand me.....what I think is rotten about Penn State, is that after reviewing that 439 page guidebook, I believe that Joe Paterno was fully aware that the NCAA could do nothign to Penn State based on Sandusky's behavior, especially since he was dismissed as a coach already.

I believe that had the NCAA guidebook had provisions in there, such that the Penn State athletic department would have been punished severely by in any way being part of failing to report Sandusky to proper authorities, Sandusky would have been in handcuffs a long, long time ago.

That's what's rotten. THe NCAA needs a major overhaul, and it's becoming more and more apparent with each passing athletic sports season
 
Rondogg said:
"especially since it didn't effect the game"

How did it NOT affect the game. They covered up the abuse so that the Program wouldn't be affected negatively. They won recruits and games because they hid the truth. And if it comes out that there was a conspiracy to cover this up then they should be penalized by the NCAA.

You were joking when you said it didn't effect the game. I certainly hope so. So hard to tell sarcasm in someones post.
Expand ...

Can you explain why they reported Sandusky in 1999 but not in 2001? Was it because they didn't care about the football program's rep in 1999 but they did care about it in 2001?
 
mattp said:
yeah, because that's exactly what i said, you friggin genius.

since your reading comprehension is obviously poor, why don't you have someone else read my post to you and you'll see where i said i want everyone involved in the cover up punished. You, on the other hand are more worried about punishing the school, every PSU student/teacher/alumni, and high school kids that needs scholarships. that you can't tell the difference is ridiculous and i'm done discussing this....this time i mean it (i hope)
Expand ...

The reason there are punishments is so society, or an organization (the NCAA) in this case, does not reward the crime. I know this board is littered with Penn State apologists, so my position will not be well received by some. But the school benefited from the cover up for years. Penn State knew Sandusky was a monster in the mid-90's, and did nothing. How many children were raped and how many games did Penn State win from that point on? An example needs to be set, otherwise every organization that engages in bad behavior just needs to find someone willing to be the scapegoat and they are home free.

The university has an affirmative responsibility to stop this kind of conduct. "I didn't know" is not an acceptable response for something that was going on for over a decade.
 
upstater said:
What document are you referring to? The presentment? That came out in November of 2011. The investigation of the first case started in March 2011.
Expand ...

Upstater,

I respect you as a poster, but you are so far on the wrong side of this issue, you need to drop it. Penn State hid a monster for over a decade. If this happened at UConn, I would want a multi-year death penalty in the sport in question and frankly a re-assessment of the entire athletic program. I wouldn't be saying "please don't punish the fans".
 
Carl Spackler said:
I believe that had the NCAA guidebook had provisions in there, such that the Penn State athletic department would have been punished severely by in any way being part of failing to report Sandusky to proper authorities, Sandusky would have been in handcuffs a long, long time ago.
Expand ...

This is one of the craziest things I've ever read on this board. You think the NCAA is going to legislate that all schools should report people to proper authorities? When those very same schools have procedures for reporting (as does practically every big business in America), procedures that involve law enforcement, legal experts, psychologists, etc.? Really? The NCAA is going to tell them what to do?
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
Upstater,

I respect you as a poster, but you are so far on the wrong side of this issue, you need to drop it. Penn State hid a monster for over a decade. If this happened at UConn, I would want a multi-year death penalty in the sport in question and frankly a re-assessment of the entire athletic program. I wouldn't be saying "please don't punish the fans".
Expand ...

Go reread your posts and then get back to me. The idea you would lecture people after what you wrote to mattp is totally preposterous.

"Anyone who thinks covering up a serial rapist is not deserving of punishment needs to re-think their priorities."

Anyone who covered up a serial rapist is about to be convicted or let go in a criminal court. Did Mattp or anyone else say they deserve to go unpunished?
 
NHUConnfan said:
I just don't see the point in penalizing the football players for this. Absolutely none of them had a part in this. And what is the NCAA really about (or at least supposed to be about)...the kids.
Remember, the game is about the kids!
Expand ...

I skipped a few lines but rereading the ones that jumped out at me makes it seem even more absurd. That rationalization basically absolves any University from any sanction for anything so we don't disrupt the careers of the athletes. The football players can transfer to another university without penalty if the NCAA sees it your way as I do also. You're right about one thing. It is about the kids, although you fail to understand which kids we are trying to protect here.

To go back to the jurisdiction argument I think this had everything to do with protecting the reputation and the stature of the football program, and that in and of itself is about keeping a competitive advantage for recruiting and promotion of the team. Maybe I don't have the smoking gun e-mail to spell it out, but the connections of these acts to the footbal program are no less than being fully intertwined. It's really not a reach to say theres' a lot of circumstantial evidence but we'll see how it plays out.
 
Two things:

#1. The case is still ongoing, until it's proven that Penn State officials, acted criminally in any way regarding Sandusky and his sexual predator behavior on young boys, all of this is just discussion, none of it becomes a potential - POTENTIAL - NCAA issue until representatives of the athletic interests of penn state are implicated somehow beyond Sandusky's obviously criminal behavior that had nothing to do with intercollegiate athletics, and the NCAA has no rules (which it should) about how an athletic department should handle reporting to proper authorities - suspected or known criminal behavior.

#2. If it's proven that PSU officials didn't do anything illegal (failure to properly report Sandusky) - stop there, nothing else to investigate.

#3. If it's proven that Pennsylvania government officials, or the local police and district attorney's office acted improperly - clearly not NCAA territory.

#4....IF - it's proven that PSU officials acted illegally in failure to properly report Sandusky - they are subject to full punishment by PA law.

#5. The only way the NCAA can have any grounds to even begin to do anything, is if somewhere along the way - a PSU official indicates that their illegal actions (yet to be proven) were motivated by the interests of protecting the reputation of the PSU athletic department.



What it all means - is two fold. First - as we all know, the NCAA guidelines are FUBAR and are in need of complete revision. Second - is my opinion - and that's that had the NCAA guides had some kind of provision for severe penalties should an athletic department official be found to have knowledge of criminal behavior occuring in the instituion, and fail to properly report it....IF - that existed - my position is that Joe Paterno would have handled things a lot differently regarding Sandusky.

And it disgusts me beyond belief. It has soiled Penn State University beyond repair for me.
 
Carl, you left out the reality of the case, which is #6: The two PSU principals on trial for the Sandusky case are on the dock for perjury, not for not reporting.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Penn State hid a monster for over a decade. If this happened at UConn, I would want a multi-year death penalty in the sport in question and frankly a re-assessment of the entire athletic program. I wouldn't be saying "please don't punish the fans".
Expand ...

PennState currently has almost 100k students, almost 9000 faculty, and over a million alumni. PennState didn't hide a monster, some of their administrators hid a monster and i hope they go to jail.
 
mattp said:
it's not less egregious it's a matter of jurisdiction. if a man commits a murder killing spree at a mall, he goes to jail, he doesn't get banned from the mall. maybe that's a bad analogy but i hope it's close enough to show what i'm getting at.
Expand ...

I think this is more like the owner of the mall letting the former manager of the Disney store take kids into the back and rape them because Disney is a good draw. The football program is essentially the Disney store here.
 
.-.
Jimdish255 said:
I think this is more like the owner of the mall letting the manager at the Disney store take kids into the back and rape them because Disney is a good draw.
Expand ...

And what does the owner of the mall get out of it?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Penn State won't get punished because they are Penn State. It has nothing to do with NCAA jurisdiction.

If Paterno didn't think the NCAA would get involved, why cover it up? He hadn't committed any crimes.

And EVERYONE in college football knew Sandusky was at least a weirdo, if not worse. This was the top defensive coordinator in college for over 15 years, and never got a sniff of a head job. Someone was telling schools to stay away.
Expand ...


Why cover it up? Because Joe Paterno was in charge of Pennsylvania State University, and he decided that covering up and keeping the handling of an issue as ugly as Sandusky in house and out of the public eye was the proper course of action, and he had the connections in the legislative, judicial and executive branches of local and state government to make that kind of decision. My opinion.
 
Carl Spackler said:
Why cover it up? Because Joe Paterno was in charge of Pennsylvania State University, and he decided that covering up and keeping the handling of an issue as ugly as Sandusky in house and out of the public eye was the proper course of action, and he had the connections in the legislative, judicial and executive branches of local and state government to make that kind of decision. My opinion.
Expand ...

Then why report it in 1999?
 
.-.
Jimdish255 said:
Why did we have to explain that?
Expand ...

Because this sentence makes no sense:
I think this is more like the owner of the mall letting the former manager of the Disney store take kids into the back and rape them because Disney is a good draw.
Expand ...
 
Carl Spackler said:
Why cover it up? Because Joe Paterno was in charge of Pennsylvania State University, and he decided that covering up and keeping the handling of an issue as ugly as Sandusky in house and out of the public eye was the proper course of action, and he had the connections in the legislative, judicial and executive branches of local and state government to make that kind of decision. My opinion.
Expand ...

i think you hit on the even bigger issue, and that's all the people in the police department, local government, prosecutors, etc. that helped this cover up either explicitly or by looking the other way. people at PennState did report this at one point and it was still swept under the rug for over a decade
 
upstater said:
Carl, you left out the reality of the case, which is #6: The two PSU principals on trial for the Sandusky case are on the dock for perjury, not for not reporting.
Expand ...

How did they generate a perjury accusation?
 
upstater said:
Because this sentence makes no sense:
Expand ...

it's not less egregious it's a matter of jurisdiction. if a man commits a murder killing spree at a mall, he goes to jail, he doesn't get banned from the mall. maybe that's a bad analogy but i hope it's close enough to show what i'm getting at.​
Expand ...

But this made perfect sense to you. I give up.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,327
Messages
4,564,202
Members
10,463
Latest member
Liam Rainst


Top Bottom